S. Mohanpandi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.10.2017 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR CRL.O.P(MD)No.12315 of 2017 S.Mohanpandi ... Petitioner/Accused (Rank not known) Vs.

1. The State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, K.K.Nagar Police Station, Trichy District.

(Crime No.576 of 2017) ... Respondent / Complainant

2. S.Saravanan ... Respondent/De-facto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in Crime No.576 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent and to quash the same as far as the petitioner is concerned.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Sathiyamoorthy For R-1 : Mr.K.S.Durai Pandiyan, Additional Public Prosecutor.

For R-2 : Mr.K.Pal Murugan

O R D E R

This Criminal Original petition is filed for quashing the First Information Report in Crime No.576 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent, in so far as the petitioner is concerned.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.

3.The petitioner is the accused(rank not known) in the proceedings. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the second respondent/de-facto complainant, a case was registered in Crime No.576 of 2017, dated 25.07.2017, for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(ii) of I.P.C.

4. It appears that the parties, namely, the petitioner and the second respondent have settled their dispute amicably out of Court, on the advise of the elders and well wishers. The parties also have https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

entered into a compromise. A Joint Compromise Memo signed by the petitioner and the de-facto complainant in the presence of their respective counsels is produced before this Court. As per the Joint Compromise memo, it is stated that in order to continue their cordial relationship and friendship, the parties have settled their dispute and that the second respondent has no objection for withdrawing the criminal complaint and for quashing the First Information Report in Crime No.576 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent.

5.

The parties, namely, the petitioner and the second respondent appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed the Joint Compromise Memo on their own free will and volition. The identity of the parties are verified with reference to the authenticated documents produced by the parties before this Court. The identity of the parties are also confirmed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor through the first respondent police.

6. Having regard to the specific terms of the Joint Compromise Memo, this Court is of the view that no useful or fruitful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Hence, on the basis of the Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties, the Criminal Original petition is allowed and the First Information Report in Crime No.576 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent is quashed in so far as the petitioner is concerned. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl.: Xerox copy of Compromise Memo To

1. The Inspector of Police, K.K.Nagar Police Station, Trichy District.

2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+ 1 CC TO Mr.P.SATHIYAMOORTHY, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 82595 PMU TE/MR-KKR/SAR-I : 27/10/2017 : 2P/4C CRL OP(MD)No.12315 of 2017 11.10.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/